Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Current (health company)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Current (health company)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

non notable company--sources refer only to early funding and do not meet WP:NCORP  DGG ( talk ) 17:24, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete The article in its current condition does not meet WP:GNG and my quick Google search likewise finds no supporting evidence of notability.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  22:10, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete No obvious sources of notability; small company using WP for promotional purposes. Britishfinance (talk) 01:37, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete As noted above there is no clear sign of notability and the article does rather read as being promotional. Dunarc (talk) 21:19, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Woah, slow down there, amigos! As the author of the page, I'd like to point out that I've created many articles on Wikipedia ranging from current businesses to biographies of women in British colonial history. This is not PR for a company, neither am I acting on their behalf. Secondly, this article has sources including The Guardian and BBC News. Clearly these are highly authoritative sources. There a multiple other sources for this company. FunkyCanute (talk) 14:21, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: sourcing does not meet WP:CORPDEPTH; they are passing mentions and / or detail company hopes and aspirations. Borderline WP:PROMO directory listing. WP:TOOSOON per review of available sources. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.